Bill C-18:
An Act to amend the Rouge National Urban Park Act,
the Parks Canada Agency Act and
the Canada National Parks Act
Publication No. 42-1-C18-E
19 July 2016
Penny Becklumb
Tim Williams
Economics, Resources and International Affairs Division
Parliamentary Information and Research Service
Library of Parliament Legislative Summaries summarize government bills currently
before Parliament and provide background about them in an objective and impartial
manner. They are prepared by the Parliamentary Information and Research Service,
which carries out research for and provides information and analysis to
parliamentarians and Senate and House of Commons committees and parliamentary
associations. Legislative Summaries are revised as needed to reflect amendments
made to bills as they move through the legislative process.
Notice: For clarity of exposition, the legislative proposals set out in the bill described
in this Legislative Summary are stated as if they had already been adopted or were
in force. It is important to note, however, that bills may be amended during their
consideration by the House of Commons and Senate, and have no force or effect
unless and until they are passed by both houses of Parliament, receive Royal
Assent, and come into force.
Any substantive changes in this Legislative Summary that have been made since the
preceding issue are indicated in bold print.
© Library of Parliament, Ottawa, Canada, 2016
Legislative Summary of Bill C-18
(Legislative Summary)
Publication No. 42-1-C18-E
Ce document est également publié en français.
CONTENTS
1
BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................... 1
1.1
Amendments to the Rouge National Urban Park Act ............................................ 1
1.2
Amendments to the Parks Canada Agency Act ..................................................... 2
1.3
Amendments to the Canada National Parks Act ................................................... 3
2
DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS .............................................................................. 4
2.1
Amendments to the Rouge National Urban Park Act ............................................ 4
2.2
Amendments to the Parks Canada Agency Act ..................................................... 5
2.3
Amendments to the Canada National Parks Act ................................................... 5
LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT
i
PUBLICATION NO. 42-1-C18-E
LEGISLATIVE SUMMARY OF BILL C-18:
AN ACT TO AMEND THE ROUGE NATIONAL URBAN PARK
ACT, THE PARKS CANADA AGENCY ACT AND
THE CANADA NATIONAL PARKS ACT
1
BACKGROUND
Bill C-18, An Act to amend the Rouge National Urban Park Act, the Parks Canada
Agency Act and the Canada National Parks Act, 1 was introduced by the Minister of
Environment and Climate Change in the House of Commons on 9 June 2016.
The bill makes three distinct changes. It amends the Rouge National Urban Park
Act 2 to accord the same level of ecological protection to the Rouge National Urban
Park as is currently accorded to Canada’s national parks, and it expands the park.
Second, the bill amends the Parks Canada Agency Act 3 to allow the New Parks and
Historic Sites Account to be used for national parks and historic sites that have
attained full operational status. Third, it amends the Canada National Parks Act 4 to
change the boundary of Wood Buffalo National Park in northern Alberta.
1.1
AMENDMENTS TO THE ROUGE NATIONAL URBAN PARK ACT
The Rouge National Urban Park Act, establishing the first national urban park in
Canada, came into force on 15 May 2015. The current size of the park as outlined in
the schedule to the Act is approximately 2 km2. The final planned area is to be
79.1 km2, after federal land transferred from Transport Canada to Parks Canada is
formally added to the schedule, in addition to land to be transferred from Ontario,
from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and from various municipalities. 5
The transfer of land from Ontario is dependent on the fulfillment of a memorandum of
understanding between Ontario and the federal government in which the parties
agreed that Parks Canada would “work with Ontario to develop written policies in
respect of the creation, management and administration of the Park that meet or
exceed provincial policies regarding the Transferred Lands.” 6 Whether this criterion
was met under the terms of the Rouge National Urban Park Act has been at the
centre of discussions regarding the impending transfer of the provincial lands.
During Parliament’s study of Bill C-40 (the legislation enacted as the Rouge National
Urban Park Act), the federal government argued that it would provide even greater
protection of the parkland than is provided by the province. In testimony before the
House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development
(the Environment Committee), the Minister of the Environment noted that proposed
protections would prohibit mining, hunting and the removal of native plants, while
offering protections under the Species at Risk Act and addressing waste dumping,
among other things. The minister noted that the Province of Ontario did not offer
these protections for parklands.7
LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT
1
PUBLICATION NO. 42-1-C18-E
LEGISLATIVE SUMMARY OF BILL C-18
Other stakeholders argued that protections extended to the parkland in Bill C-40 and the
draft park management plan did not fulfill the requirement to meet or exceed provincial
standards for ecological integrity. As a result, the Ontario government has refused to
transfer approximately 22 km2 of land to Parks Canada to be formally included in the
national urban park. 8 Major environmental groups supported this refusal. 9
Maintenance or restoration of ecological integrity 10 is the first management
priority for national parks under section 8(2) of the Canada National Parks Act.
In testimony before the Environment Committee, the Minister of the Environment,
Leona Aglukkaq, argued that it was not possible to accomplish ecological integrity in
the Rouge National Urban Park. She stated:
The ecosystems have integrity when their native components remain intact,
but because ecosystems are constantly changing, conservation strategies
that have ecological integrity as their goal must also allow processes that
reflect the ecosystem’s natural conditions. That means such ecological
processes as wildfires, flooding, and pest outbreaks would need to be
allowed to run their natural course, which is not desirable and realistic in an
urban setting. The park includes major highways, rail lines, hydro corridors,
as well as farmland, and seven million people live on the Rouge’s doorstep.
Applying in the legislation the concept of ecological integrity as we do in
national parks would make it impossible to permit the type of sustainable
11
farming that has been taking place in the Rouge for centuries.
Bill C-18 makes ecological integrity the first management priority for Rouge National
Urban Park, but it also provides for the carrying out of agricultural activities in the park.
Following the introduction of Bill C-18, the Ontario Minister of Economic Development
and Growth is reported to have recommended to the provincial Cabinet that the
Ontario lands be transferred to the federal government. 12 However, some stakeholders
argue that the transfer should not take place until Bill C-18 is amended to “support
the implementation of existing Greenbelt, Rouge Park and Watershed Plans. These
existing science-based Plans were approved after decades of public, government
and stakeholder consultation.” 13
1.2
AMENDMENTS TO THE PARKS CANADA AGENCY ACT
Section 21(1) of the Parks Canada Agency Act established an account in the accounts
of Canada known as the New Parks and Historic Sites Account. Both Parliament and
Parks Canada may credit funds – including gifts, bequests and other forms of
donation – to the account. Payments from the New Parks and Historic Sites Account
may only be made for new protected heritage areas and unfinished national parks,
national marine conservation areas and national historic sites. 14
According to the 2012–2013 Parks Canada Agency Corporate Plan, the guidelines
for use of the fund mean that the national parks eligible for funding from the New Parks
and Historic Sites Account are:
•
Sirmilik;
•
Ukkusiksalik;
LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT
2
PUBLICATION NO. 42-1-C18-E
LEGISLATIVE SUMMARY OF BILL C-18
•
Gulf Islands;
•
Torngat Mountains;
•
Nahanni (related to expansion);
•
Sable Island;
•
Nááts’ihch’oh; and
•
Bathurst Island [Qausuittuq]. 15
Bill C-18 amends the Parks Canada Agency Act to allow the government to use the
account to expand or complete national parks, national marine conservation areas
and national historic sites that have reached full operational status.
1.3
AMENDMENTS TO THE CANADA NATIONAL PARKS ACT
Under Bill C-18, the Canada National Parks Act is amended to modify the boundary
of Wood Buffalo National Park.
Wood Buffalo National Park was established in 1922 to protect the last free roaming
herds of wood bison in northern Canada. At 44,807 km2, it is Canada’s largest
national park. 16
The park was created on Indigenous traditional territories that were the subject of
Treaty 8, signed in 1899.17 According to the 2010 Wood Buffalo National Park
management plan, “[t]here are 11 distinct Aboriginal groups in and around the park
that come from Chipewyan, Cree and Métis roots and eight Indian Reserves within its
boundaries.” 18 In addition, “[o]ver the life of the park, the management and regulation
of traditional use has been a contentious right-versus-privilege based issue.” 19
One of the mechanisms used to resolve these disputes has been negotiations to
excise land from the park to enable fuller use by Indigenous communities and in
some cases to resolve land claims settlements. For example, the Peace Point
community was excised from the park in 1988 for the creation of a reserve under the
terms of a 1986 Treaty Land Entitlement Agreement. 20
Negotiations have been ongoing for decades with the Little Red River Cree Nation
regarding the possibility of excising the Garden River (Creek) settlement on the
Peace River in the southwestern part of the park, though this is not related to a land
claims settlement.
The Garden River (Creek) settlement, initially the location of seasonal Indigenous
camps, became a permanent settlement in the 1950s with the advent of logging in
the area. After the sawmill closed in 1976, the inhabitants shifted focus to traditional
uses of the land while requesting further community amenities. The 1984 Wood
Buffalo National Park Management Plan identified the community as a “nonconforming use in the context of the park zoning plan.” The solution identified was a
long-term plan to excise the community from the park.21
LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT
3
PUBLICATION NO. 42-1-C18-E
LEGISLATIVE SUMMARY OF BILL C-18
According to one account, an agreement on Garden River (Creek) was approved by
Cabinet in 1994, but further discussions with the Little Red River Cree Nation were
delayed. The final boundary of the proposed reserve had therefore not been
determined by the time Bill C-27, now the Canada National Parks Act, was
introduced in 2000. 22 Accordingly, section 38(1)(a) of that Act empowers the Governor
in Council to amend the description of Wood Buffalo National Park to withdraw lands
from the park required to establish an Indian reserve in the vicinity of Garden River
(Creek). The parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Heritage at the time stated that
“[p]rovisions are made in the bill to remove lands from Wood Buffalo and Wapusk to
accommodate treaty land entitlement.” 23
By 2010, negotiations between the government and the Little Red River Cree Nation
regarding the excision of the Garden River (Creek) community were almost
finalized. 24 According to the backgrounder accompanying Bill C-18, the amendment
honours the Government of Canada’s commitment to the Little Red River Cree
Nation. 25
2
2.1
DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS
AMENDMENTS TO THE ROUGE NATIONAL URBAN PARK ACT
Currently, section 6 of the Rouge National Urban Park Act requires that, in managing
the park, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change take into consideration the
protection of the park’s ecological health. Clause 2 of Bill C-18 replaces section 6 of
the Act with a new, stricter requirement that the minister’s first priority, when considering
all aspects of the management of the park, be maintenance or restoration of ecological
integrity. Clause 1 of the bill adds the following definition for “ecological integrity” to
section 2 of the Act:
ecological integrity means, with respect to the Park, a condition that is
determined to be characteristic of its natural region and likely to persist,
including abiotic components and the composition and abundance of native
species and biological communities, rates of change and supporting
processes.
This definition of “ecological integrity” and the statement regarding the minister’s first
management priority are almost identical to provisions included in the Canada
National Parks Act. In other words, Bill C-18 provides the same level of ecological
protection for Rouge National Urban Park as is currently provided for national parks.
One proviso to this statement is the confirmation, in new section 6(2) of the Rouge
National Urban Park Act, that the minister’s requirement to prioritize ecological
integrity of the park “does not prevent the carrying out of agricultural activities as
provided for in [the] Act.” Section 9(2) of the Act continues to require that the
management plan for the park include “the presentation of agricultural heritage and
the encouragement of sustainable farming practices.”
Clause 3 amends the schedule to the Act to formally add 17.1 km2 of land transferred
from Transport Canada to the northern portion of the park, which currently covers 2 km2.
LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT
4
PUBLICATION NO. 42-1-C18-E
LEGISLATIVE SUMMARY OF BILL C-18
An additional 60 km2 of parkland have yet to be added to the schedule and formally
included in the park. Once fully established, the park is expected to occupy 79.1 km2.26
2.2
AMENDMENTS TO THE PARKS CANADA AGENCY ACT
Clause 4 of the bill amends section 21 of the Parks Canada Agency Act, which
establishes and defines the uses of the New Parks and Historic Sites Account.
Specifically, the bill repeals wording that limits use of the account for protected
heritage areas that have not yet attained full operational status. The government
backgrounder published with Bill C-18 provides the following explanation:
The proposed amendment would allow the Government to use the account,
and the public to donate funds, to expand or complete national parks,
national marine conservation areas and national historic sites that have
27
attained full operational status, including Rouge National Urban Park.
As a consequence of this change, sections 21(4) and 21(5) of the Act, which require
the Agency’s Chief Executive Officer to develop guidelines and make determinations
regarding whether a protected heritage area has attained full operational status, are
no longer required and are therefore repealed.
2.3
AMENDMENTS TO THE CANADA NATIONAL PARKS ACT
Clause 5 of Bill C-18 removes a 37-km2 parcel of land from the description of
Wood Buffalo National Park in Schedule 1 of the Canada National Parks Act.
Clause 6 adjusts the wording of the French version of the existing description of
Wood Buffalo National Park without making a substantial change.
NOTES
1.
Bill C-18, An Act to amend the Rouge National Urban Park Act, the Parks Canada
Agency Act and the Canada National Parks Act, 1st Session, 42nd Parliament
(first reading version, 9 June 2016).
2.
Rouge National Urban Park Act, S.C. 2015, c. 10.
3.
Parks Canada Agency Act, S.C. 1998, c. 31.
4.
Canada National Parks Act, S.C. 2000, c. 32.
5.
For more information on the background of Rouge Park and Bill C-40, An Act respecting
the Rouge National Urban Park, see Penny Becklumb and Tim Williams, Legislative
Summary of Bill C-40: An Act respecting the Rouge National Urban Park, Publication
no. 41-2-C40-E, Parliamentary Information and Research Service, Library of Parliament,
Ottawa, 18 July 2014. For information about lands to be added to the park, see the
Memorandum of Agreement Respecting the Establishment of the Proposed Rouge
National Urban Park (between the governments of Canada and Ontario), 26 January 2013
[MOU respecting Rouge National Urban Park]; and the Memorandum of Agreement
Respecting the Assembly of Lands for the Proposed Rouge National Urban Park
(between the federal government, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, and
various municipalities), 2014.
LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT
5
PUBLICATION NO. 42-1-C18-E
LEGISLATIVE SUMMARY OF BILL C-18
6.
MOU respecting Rouge National Urban Park (2013), art. 2.09.
7.
House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development
[ENVI], Evidence, 27 October 2014 (Hon. Leona Aglukkaq, Minister of the Environment,
Minister of the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency and Minister for the
Arctic Council).
8.
Brad Duguid, Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure
(Ontario), Letter to Leona Aglukkaq, Minister of the Environment and Minister
Responsible for Parks Canada, (Re: Bill C-40, An Act respecting the Rouge National
Urban Park), 2 September 2014.
9.
Environmental Defence, “Statement by major environmental groups applauds Ontario’s
refusal to transfer Rouge Park lands to Parks Canada until proposed Rouge National
Urban Park Act is strengthened,” 3 September 2014.
10.
Section 2(1) of the Canada National Parks Act states that:
ecological integrity means, with respect to a park, a condition that is
determined to be characteristic of its natural region and likely to persist,
including abiotic components and the composition and abundance of
native species and biological communities, rates of change and supporting
processes.
11.
ENVI (2014), 1545 (Aglukkaq).
12.
“Prime Minister Justin Trudeau paddles the Rouge in Scarborough,” Scarborough Mirror,
Inside Toronto.com, 18 June 2016.
13.
Kevin O’Connor, Friends of the Rouge Watershed, “Federal Government Introduces
Amendments to National Rouge Park Legislation (Bill C-18) One Important Commitment
Fulfilled, Three Important Commitments Not Yet Fulfilled,” Friends of the Rouge
Watershed Facebook post, 9 June 2016. Also reported in Kristen Calis, “More protections
for Rouge Park in Toronto, Pickering, but Province still hasn’t handed over its land;
Brad Duguid, minister of economic development, employment and infrastructure, to make
announcement about Rouge Park on Saturday,” Pickering News Advertiser,
durhamregion.com, 17 June 2016.
14.
See Parks Canada Agency Act, s. 21(3); and Parks Canada Agency, “New Parks and
Historic Sites Account – Source and Use of Funds,” in “Section IV – Other Items of
Interest,” 2012–2013 Parks Canada Agency Corporate Plan, 2012.
15.
Parks Canada Agency (2012).
16.
Parks Canada, Wood Buffalo National Park of Canada Management Plan 2010,
June 2010.
17.
See Dennis F. K. Madill, “Treaty Research Report – Treaty Eight (1899),” Indian and
Northern Affairs Canada, 1986.
18.
Parks Canada (2010), p. 7.
19.
Ibid.
20.
Ibid., pp. 64–65.
Treaty Land Entitlement claims are intended to settle the land debt owed
to those First Nations who did not receive all the land they were entitled to
under historical treaties signed by the Crown and First Nations. Settlement
agreements are negotiated among First Nations, the Government of
Canada and provincial/territorial governments. According to the terms of
the agreement, a specified amount of Crown lands is identified and/or a
cash settlement is provided so that a First Nation may purchase federal,
provincial/territorial, or private land to settle the land debt.
LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT
6
PUBLICATION NO. 42-1-C18-E
LEGISLATIVE SUMMARY OF BILL C-18
21.
Minister of the Environment and Minister of Supply and Services Canada, Wood Buffalo
National Park Management Plan, 1984.
22.
George Wright Society, Questions and Answers about Canada’s New National Park Act:
An HTML version of the 1999 NPA Briefing Book, January 2000.
23.
House of Commons, Debates, 2nd Session, 36th Parliament, 13 June 2000, 1330
(Mauril Bélanger, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Canadian Heritage).
24.
Parks Canada (2010).
25.
Government of Canada, “An Act to amend the Rouge National Urban Park Act, the Parks
Canada Agency Act and the Canada National Parks Act,” Backgrounder, 9 June 2016.
26.
Ibid.
27.
Ibid.
LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT
7
PUBLICATION NO. 42-1-C18-E